In a recent High Court case the judge said as the road was narrow and without cycle lanes, the cyclist had made a “reasonable decision” to cycle on the pavement.
Cycling on the pavement can be OK
- Thread starter Red Light
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
2Loose
Guru
- Location
- Loughborough, Leicestershire.
Go Judge! Having followed this case and viewed the road\works layout I fully agree.
Although I do wonder what the decision would have been if the victim had not been a copper.
rowan 46
Über Member
- Location
- birmingham
this could open a can of worms
crumpetman
Well-Known Member
[QUOTE 1447813"]
...if not causing any problems...
[/quote]
This is true, on more than one occasion I have seen a pavement cyclist go past a policeman and not a word was said. On the other hand, in the busy pedestrianised town centre where cycling is prohibited you can often see pairs of coppers stationed at regular intervals asking cyclists to get off and walk their bikes.
...if not causing any problems...
[/quote]
This is true, on more than one occasion I have seen a pavement cyclist go past a policeman and not a word was said. On the other hand, in the busy pedestrianised town centre where cycling is prohibited you can often see pairs of coppers stationed at regular intervals asking cyclists to get off and walk their bikes.
The difference as far as I see it is in the place and circumstances where it occurs....
I suspect the judge would not have been as lenient had this been in a busy pedestrian precinct.
This is a one off, and I would not imagine that it sets any precedent
London is more the exception rather than the rule for the UK - there are a lot more cyclists there purely because there's more people there. When I was younger I often used to cycle on the pavement as I was too scared to go on the road, but I was never told by a copper to not do it. I knew it was illegal but they didn't enforce it.
I've done that where I live. I did it past a police van full of coppers and they just waved me by!
As a High Court case it definitely sets a precedent although not being a lawyer I don't know whether that is restricted to liability issues or provides a defence to cycling on the pavement alongside the famous Paul Boateng letter. What the judge said was:
17. The Defendants primary case is that the Claimant had 'responsibility' for his accident by (1) negligently cycling upon the pavement and the street works management system, contrary to Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 and the Highway Code or (2) carelessly walking though the area with his cycle either astride it or besides him.
43. In my judgment, this piece of road was dangerous for all but the most experienced, traffic fast, confident and dominant of cyclists i.e. the 'serious' cyclist as Mr Ibbotson puts it, as opposed to the ordinary prudent cyclist using a cycle to go to work encumbered with his cycle rucksack.
44. In my judgment, although it is illegal for cyclists to use the pavement (unless it is specifically sanctioned by a local authority for shared use), when weighing up the danger to himself (cp danger to pedestrians) it was a reasonable decision by the Claimant to ride on the pavements in this area rather than the road in the context of the duty of care owed to himself to take reasonable care for his own safety whilst cycling. In my judgment, although illegal and potentially negligent in any action vis a vis a pedestrian, it was not "blameworthy" in terms of negligence in contributory negligence.(my emphasis)
There is still no "precedent' for cycling on the pavement under normal circumstances.
The judgement (the way I see it) has referred to a specific set of circumstances.
To argue this as a defense when you get an FPN for cycling in a precinct or residential area would be difficult unless the road was demonstrably dangerous and unusable to most cyclists.
The judgement (the way I see it) has referred to a specific set of circumstances.
To argue this as a defense when you get an FPN for cycling in a precinct or residential area would be difficult unless the road was demonstrably dangerous and unusable to most cyclists.
rowan 46
Über Member
- Location
- birmingham
agreed
But it closely parallels Home Office guidance that the FPN legislation was not intended to penalise cyclists who use the pavement out of fear of traffic and show consideration to others when doing so.
Its also not illegal anyway to cycle in a precinct unless there is a specific TRO or bylaw banning cycling. The Highway Act 1835 does not apply to precincts, only pavements alongside the road.
It might not set a precedent but it does appear to offer a mitigation defence but IANAL.
apollo179
Well-Known Member
Is that right. I was unaware that cycling on the pavement was illegal let alone you could get a fpn for it.
You need to go and read the highway code.
Angelfishsolo
A Velocipedian
- Location
- Cwmbach, South Wales
The primary legislation which makes cycling on a footway an offence is section 72 of the 1835 Highways Act, this provides that a person shall be guilty of an offence if he “shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot-passengers or shall wilfully lead or drive any carriage of any description upon any such footpath or causeway.”
Section 85 of the Local Government Act 1888 extended the definition of “carriage” to include “bicycles, tricycles, velocipedes and other similar machines.”
The object of Section 72 Highways Act 1835 was intended not to protect all footpaths, but only footpaths or causeways by the side of a road, and that this is still the case has been ruled in the high court. The legislation makes no exceptions for small wheeled or children’s cycles, so even a child riding on a footway is breaking the law. However, if they are under the age of criminal responsibility they cannot, of course, face prosecution. See below.
On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. The then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that:
“The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”
Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by ‘Community Support Officers’ and wardens.
“CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice.
I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)
apollo179
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info AFS - interesting reading and in consideration seems fair enough. In effect the fpn is to combat delinquent cyclists causing a danger on the pavement. I do sometimes cycle on the pavement and in pedestrianised areas but always with the greatest care.
